Hey, that's my name! or... is it weird hearing your name on the radio/tv/internet/games?

Ok, they just hired Jason Oestreicher, which I hear has caused a ruckus with some folks. But for me, its strange because my real name is Jason. So when listening to the podcast when I heard "Jason" I would kinna perk up abit, thinking someone was calling my name. I'll even admit the whole "JASON" meme from Heavy Rain was weird too.

I don't really know many people named Jason IRL, so when I hear it, I just assume they are referring to me.

Does anyone else do this? Is there a Jeff on the forums that ever goes "heh.. that's me" when they listen in?

This is what I say in almost every topic where someone suggests that viewing something results in aberrant behavior; Life does not imitate art, art imitates life.

Exactly :3

Experiences both good and bad add the the tapestry of life. Movies like the Borne Identity and Saving Private Ryan imitate life, and that experience of people thrust into those experiences is engaging! And I hope our instincts to protect don't get in the way of making entertainment that is mostly harmless.

Do you think similarities between the incidents in Boston could affect the launch of Watch Dogs?

The appearance of the suspected bombers and the look and feel of Chicago and Boston are very similar. Also the game seems to be about a rather abberant hero who is working against the police towards some goal, which to a layman could look like terrorism.

You should write for Kotaku. Sensational? Check! One paragraph? Check!

Did you read anything or did you wander to the bottom to post your snark?

What is the point of a forum if you are just gonna see OP and go: "pfftt... I'm gonna write something witty so everyone will know how dumb I think OP is and not reflect on anything or offer any real discussion on the topic."

It wouldn't be anything new! How many times have you seen ignorant people draw conclusions from false or incomplete information? News outlets saying GTA has rape, newscasters talking about games that don't even exist, it totally happens.

I really thought this was going to be about the surveillance aspect of Watch Dogs. Since surveillance played a major role in finding the suspects, Watch Dogs' examination of the morality of public cameras becomes all the more relevant. Games can be relevant and focus on questions that trouble the modern world. I'm happy Watch Dogs is looking that way.

Also, from the parts we have seen, it looks like Aiden is a chaotic good actor--he is not above collateral damage, but his goal is higher than terrorism. Not that a game built around being a terrorist should not exist. That could be important, too.

This is the type of discussion I was looking for. I was chilled at how a non-government controlled camera system by businesses was used by digital vigilantes to do what they thought was right and actually got it wrong! The main character from what we know is a vigilante and he uses stolen government surveillance mixed with hacked internet data to do his "anti-hero" work. I hope they touch on the mistakes that someone could make.

Also who was scared watching a Boston suburb turn into a militarized police quarantine zone. Justified or not, what was going on that day was more frightening than scenarios that Tom Clancy cooks up.

Remember that proof of concept video for a Rainbow 6 reboot?

I really love games that go for the "Thriller" style of real world scenarios. But when they get too close to real events, people who can't compartmentalize (or media who takes advantage of people who cannot) what is a game can scare away investments in these types of franchises.

Do you think similarities between the incidents in Boston could affect the launch of Watch Dogs?

The appearance of the suspected bombers and the look and feel of Chicago and Boston are very similar. Also the game seems to be about a rather abberant hero who is working against the police towards some goal, which to a layman could look like terrorism.